Here is my rough draft of my extended essay. It doesnt have cited work or anything.
I like to eat maple syrup on my pancakes. Many people enjoy this custom. When eating pancakes at a restaurant or friends house pancakes are offered with syrup. Syrup but not maple syrup. I grew up on a maple syrup farm in southern Ontario Canada. The process of boiling down Maple tree sap to create a sweet liquid is common to me and I grew up with those tastes and smells every day. Upon the first bite of regular syrup I often go through a quick emotional cycle; first shocked and then disappointed and then leveling out to neutral. I am not saying I am crazy or cry about it, but it is not what is expected. The syrup I have been served is not real maple syrup. This is not a snobby opinion rather it is my own judgement based upon the biases I have grown up with throughout my life. My mother had never tasted ‘real maple syrup’ until she moved to our farm. For her, my ‘real’ maple syrup tastes woody and strange. A big treat for my mum is Aunt Jemima’s Syrup. The exact thing that I deem a knock off of the real deal.
Authenticity in food is not quantifiable yet is often demanded in our society. Whether it is health food, fast food or ethnic food, authenticity has becomes what our society deems it to be rather than about the actual food. Who can say whose idea of the ideal or authentic pancake syrup is correct, rather it is the view of the individual, whose memories, biases and culture make up their tastes. These tastes are often adverse to the actual origin or basis of the food. That does not mean though that they are incorrect, rather that food values and cultures change through time and place. Marketers play on stereotypes and what is demanded rather than what really matters. Our food culture has become to desire something that is both unrealistic and predetermined by ourselves. Authenticity or realness of food is determined by societies, cultures and individuals and then these factors, stereotypes and biases are played upon by media and marketers to create our food cultures and values.
52% of the American food demand is for ethnic foods. But do these cultural restaurants stand up to their origins? Would the native people appreciate it or take it as an American knock off of their favourite dish. After never visiting many foreign countries, consumers demand ‘real’ ethnic foods. Restaurants and other food marketers attempt to create an ‘authentic’ experience for all diners yet will fail to give consumers what they expect by creating or reinforcing stereotypes which may or may not be true. Food is an extremely personal experience as each persons tastes vary even within a culture or family. At the same time food and culture are interrelated. What is authentic can vary but the marketing is focused towards the common aspects mixed with the current culture.
After dining at Jason’s Thai restaurant near the University of Denver Campus, I was interested in the fusion of Asian food served at a seemingly authentic Thai restaurant. While the Thai food was delicious they also offered sushi, common salads and other cuisine not found in Thailand. Instead of only offering the native foods, restaurants have an opportunity to offer new and exciting foods. This novelty seeking human characteristic leads to the menu offerings being adapted to what the consumers preferences are. (Ryu & Zhong, pg 852-871) In addition, a friend offered the insight that reading the English version and the Chinese version of the menu, different meal or meal options were offered.
The goal of many ethnic restaurants is to create a distinctively exotic yet recognizable culture (MacMillan, Palgrave. pg 242-255). Native servers music and chefs play a large role in convincing the consumer that they are dining in a place that gives them a real taste of the culture they are exploring. Going too far into the ethnic realm may create a divide in America between the native eater and the American eater. There becomes a ‘risk’ factor. (Lee et al. pg 531-538)
The ‘authentic’ ethnic food is often prepared at home in ways Americans are not accustomed to, making it seem unhealthy. A Chinese classmate for instance asked me why we do not eat chicken feet. My answer was because it is gross. He looked a little confused before replying; how are chicken feet any different than chicken wings. It is our socialization that changes our perspective on life and in that our perspective on food.
Stereotypes are prevalent within our own culture and peers. It becomes looked down upon to eat cheap, quick, unhealthy food, whereas dining on expensive foods from the ‘right’ brand is a part of social standing; a food elitism. Looking at food advertisements, the marketers of a McDonalds ad will place more emphasis on a large pictures, bright colours and big words that pop out. Our culture is so engrained that the advertisers assume the consumers know that the food there is fast, cheap and quick. They do not acknowledge health concerns rather play off of emotional factors and a quick thinking customer to take in their ad. Other brands such as Whole Foods or Starbucks are considered to be a better place to eat. They appeal to the active, health and environmentally conscious consumer because of previous biases. The actual comparison in many categories is that McDonalds is a better choice health wise. According to the National Research Council on average one is intended to have no more than 1500 mg of sodium per day. While a McDonalds Cheeseburger has 300 calories, 12 g of fat and 790 mg of sodium, a Starbucks turkey and swiss sandwich has 390 calories, 13 g of fat and 1180 mg of sodium. (1) Our culture has previously determined which restaurant is to be deemed better, healthier, more elite and which is deemed gross, fattening. Stereotypes are based on the people that eat there rather than the food that is actually being served.
Currently the health food trend has been sweeping our continent. But instead of putting the pressure on oneself to become healthy, they rely on the companies to do so themselves. When the consumer is buying a super-sized glass of pop the fact is, it is going to be unhealthy regardless. Starbucks has recently added a new size called the ‘Trenta’ which holds 31 ounces or 916 mL. (3) The average stomach is only 900 mL. Many consumers think of one food item as one serving, regardless of the portion size of that food. As Andrea Miller states, ‘the term "serving" has essentially lost it's meaning over the past 30 years. We have watched bagels grow to .500 kcal or the equivalent of 6 slices of bread, and soft drinks to 1000 mL (32 oz) from a modest 250 mL (8 oz.)’ (2)What we as society deems to be ‘authentically’ healthy, is far from what is actually healthy. It has become what will make one look the healthiest from a distance. Will I look healthier walking into a Starbucks in running clothes and coming out with a Turkey and Swiss sandwich and a Trenta Mocha Frappachino or will I look healthier eating a McDonalds Cheese burger and a super-sized pop?
We have added new terms to our health food vocabulary in order to convince ourselves and the rest of society that what we are eating is healthy. Packages that say ‘low fat’, ‘only 100 calories’, ‘pro-biotics’, ‘fat-free’, ‘light’, ‘no trans fats’, ‘organic’ are consistently bought without the consumer knowing the real meanings of the words or nutritional facts behind the product. A 100 calorie snackpack appears to some to be a healthy choice. A large apple is 110 calories yet few would say it is less healthy than a packaged low calorie snack. Though certain things are advertised the whole idea behind nutrition is getting all the facts. In many cases words like low fat are only relative to the producers other products; in essence making certain low fat products only lower in fat than their high fat products. In many cases words such as ‘organic’ can be bought. Companies paying money to governments to be able to advertise it. Other companies trademark phrases. These phrases don’t have to be factual as it is considered to just be the name of the product. These ways marketers have of talking their way around the consumer leads to the consumer feeling they have the ‘authentic’ health food yet are being misled by incomplete facts or fancy wording. It then becomes a biased market as certain brands are considered to be the real health food based off of consumer trends which are based off marketers tricks.
What is eaten is a reflection of our values. Food Values mimic Cultural or societal values. Often the authenticity of the ethnic food, the healthiest food, the most elite brand is not determined by qualities that are quantifiable or tasty, rather by predetermined biases or stereotypes. It really becomes the authenticity of the experience. An ethnic food restaurant uses music, ambiance, native staff and eaters to provide that to the american consumer. Health foods use advertising and over the top wording to convince the consumer that they are in fact becoming healthier. Elite brands use the stereotypes they have been given to create a desired effect.
There is a direct correlation between what ones values are and their food choices. Our values are our own, yet are often shaped by cultural and societal upbringings. Authenticity can only be determined by an individual, yet again, this is shaped by our lives and those around us. Maybe someone out there thinks chocolate syrup is best on pancakes. Or cinnamon and sugar. Perhaps jam or something crazier like smoked salmon and dill sauce. What is the authentic pancake topping? Only you can decide... Although if you haven’t tried my maple syrup then you really can’t know for sure can you?!
